Fitness to Teach Statistics

The reduction in cases received from 2015/16 to 2016/17 continues what was observed last year and is due to a drop in the number of criminal conviction cases received as the process of retrospective checking of criminal record information bringing teachers into the PVG Scheme has now ended.

Removal (added to Disqualified from Working with Children List (since replaced by Protecting Vulnerable Groups (PVG) Scheme))

0

-

-

-

Reprimand

0

-

-

-

Conditional Registration Order

0

-

-

-

No Order

0

-

-

-

Registration application granted

0

-

-

-

Registration application refused

0

-

-

-

Restoration application granted

0

-

-

-

Restoration application refused

0

-

-

-

Restoration application withdrawn

0

-

-

-

Facts not found proved

0

-

-

-

Impairment not found

0

-

-

-

Cases Concluded

8

Breakdown by case type (excluding Disqualified from Working with Children List cases):

Competence

0

Conviction

5

Conduct

3

Conduct and conviction

0

Subsequent registration application

0

Cases Received

A complaint may be referred to us from a variety of sources:

We are informed of any criminal convictions against an applicant for registration, as well as any other relevant non-conviction information that the police may make available, through a Protecting Vulnerable Groups (PVG) Scheme check that we carry out in respect of all applicants. We are notified directly by the police and courts of any convictions against a registrant.

Employers have a statutory duty to refer cases to GTCS if a registrant is dismissed or has resigned where otherwise they would have been dismissed on grounds of misconduct (including criminal convictions) or a lack of professional competence.

Members of the public may refer a complaint to us alleging misconduct. We cannot however consider concerns about the professional competence of a registrant submitted by a member of the public or a body other than an employer. This is because the employer is essential in providing monitoring and support to the teacher through a fair performance management process that focuses on restoring the teacher’s practice. If the teacher’s practice is not ultimately restored, the process will have gathered evidence about the teacher’s practice that can then be passed to GTCS as part of a referral. Any concerns about professional competence in respect of registrants by a member of the public or a body other than an employer must therefore be addressed to the employer.

Complaints can come to us through self-referral by an applicant for registration or registrant of any criminal convictions or information that raises allegations of professional misconduct.

The Fitness to Teach and Appeals Rules also enable us to consider information raised by the press that amounts to or may be a relevant complaint. At the same time, in most instances such information is likely to be, or to have already been, formally referred to us from another source, such as an employer.

Delegated Authority

This relates to conviction cases determined not to be a relevant complaint in accordance with delegated authority criteria approved by the GTCS Council.

Relevant complaints must relate to a false entry on the Register, raise concerns about professional competence, or, for conviction or conduct cases, allege impairment of fitness to teach.

GTCS fitness to teach functions are not punitive but protective. Our processes are about mitigating risk of future harm: they are forward looking and about the public interest. Each case is considered on an individual basis and any individual convicted of a crime that puts children or young people at risk or that suggests he/she might pose a risk to children and young people, would not be placed on the Register or allowed to remain on the Register.

Initial Consideration

A case can be screened out at this stage on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or vexatious; it does not contain enough detail to render it capable of investigation; or it is not a relevant complaint.

Relevant complaints must relate to a false entry on the Register, raise concerns about professional competence, or, for conviction or conduct cases, allege impairment of fitness to teach.

No investigation takes place at the initial consideration stage. The conclusion of this sifting (or screening) out process is that an investigation of fitness to teach is not justified.

Investigating Panel

The Investigating Panel has delegated responsibility to investigate and determine complaints made against registrants or those seeking registration in accordance with the terms of the Fitness to Teach and Appeals Rules.

Fitness to Teach Panel Complaint Outcomes

The Fitness to Teach Panel has delegated responsibility to adjudicate probationary service or complaints made against registrants or those seeking registration in accordance with the terms of the Fitness to Teach and Appeals Rules.

Removal from the Register

As the professional regulatory body for teaching in Scotland, GTCS has had the legal power to remove registrants from the Register on the grounds of misconduct (including criminal convictions) since it was established in 1965. In July 2006, GTCS was granted the additional legal power to remove registrants from the Register on the grounds of a lack of professional competence (meaning that the individual is failing to maintain our Standard for Full Registration).

Misconduct is defined with reference to our Code of Professionalism and Conduct (COPAC). This provides guidance on what this means and the types of cases that would fall into a misconduct category.

The number of registrants who have been removed from the register is small when compared to the total number of registrants on the Register, i.e. approximately 73,000. Employers have a statutory duty to refer cases to GTCS if a registrant is dismissed or has resigned where otherwise they would have been dismissed on grounds of misconduct (including criminal convictions) or professional competence. It is important to note that GTCS can only consider cases relating to professional competence referred by employers. This is because the employer is essential in providing monitoring and support to the teacher through a fair performance management process that focuses first on restoring the teacher’s practice. If the teacher’s practice is not ultimately restored, the process will have gathered evidence about the teacher’s practice that can then be passed to GTCS as part of a referral. Any concerns about professional competence in respect of registrants by a member of the public or a body other than an employer must therefore be addressed to the employer.

Removal with Consent

A process of Removal with Consent has been in place since April 2012. Through the Removal with Consent process registrants can be removed from the Register without the need for a full Fitness to Teach Panel hearing, should they admit in full the allegations against them. The impact of a Removal with Consent is exactly the same as removal following a full hearing.